Why is predestination wrong

  • Thread starter Thread starter zhangxupage
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What Mike, and most Catholics use, are all of the conditional “if statements” in the NT, as well as the warnings and descriptions of those who will go to hell, such as Gal 5:19ff
Oh so they believe that when the word “if” appears - it mean that there must be a possibility of failure?

I don’t think this is necessarily true - rather I see those statements as teaching a principle I like to call the “manifestative principle.” That is to say that if one does not “endure unto the end” then that fact only “manifests” that the person was never truly saved.

I base this on 1 John 2:19.

Besides - Jesus said: “Though you do not know him, I know him. But if I said I did not, I would be a liar like you.” (John 8:55)

Do these persons who believe in eternal insecurity believe that because Jesus laid out a hypothetical proposition using the word “if” - that this somehow meant that there was a real possibility that the Son of God could have actually denied the Father and become a liar?

If they do not hold that - then the only thing that they would be demonstrating would be a logical inconsistency- don’t you think?
 
Ok - I am a bit confused.

Romans 8 says:

“Those whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.”

But are you saying that:

“ALL those whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and ALL whom he called, them he also justified: and YET NOT ALL whom he justified, did he actually glorify.” ??

Can you give me some evidence that Augustine and Luther held to this view of the elect losing their salvation? And more importantly, can you provide me with some evidence from Scripture that a predestined person can “lose their salvation” ??

What then is one actually predestined to?
What I am saying is that all he predestined he will call, justify and glorify. However, all the justified have not been predestined to be glorified. Here is a quote from Saint Augustine from the Gift of Perseverance chapter 1

I Have now to consider the subject of perseverance with greater care; for in the former book also I said some things on this subject when I was discussing the beginning of faith. I assert, therefore, that the perseverance by which we persevere in Christ even to the end is the gift of God; and I call that the end by which is finished that life wherein alone there is peril of falling. Therefore it is uncertain whether any one has received this gift so long as he is still alive. For if he fall before he dies, he is, of course, said not to have persevered; and most truly is it said. How, then, should he be said to have received or to have had perseverance who has not persevered? For if any one have continence, and fall away from that virtue and become incontinent,— or, in like manner, if he have righteousness, if patience, if even faith, and fall away, he is rightly said to have had these virtues and to have them no longer; for he was continent, or he was righteous, or he was patient, or he was believing, as long as he was so; but when he ceased to be so, he no longer is what he was. But how should he who has not persevered have ever been persevering, since it is only by persevering that any one shows himself persevering,— and this he has not done? But lest any one should object to this, and say, If from the time at which any one became a believer he has lived— for the sake of argument— ten years, and in the midst of them has fallen from the faith, has he not persevered for five years? I am not contending about words. If it be thought that this also should be called perseverance, as it were for so long as it lasts, assuredly he is not to be said to have had in any degree that perseverance of which we are now discoursing, by which one perseveres in Christ even to the end. And the believer of one year, or of a period as much shorter as may be conceived of, if he has lived faithfully until he died, has rather had this perseverance than the believer of many years’ standing, if a little time before his death he has fallen away from the steadfastness of his faith.

From Chapter 21 from the same book:

But of two pious men, why to the one should be given perseverance unto the end, and to the other it should not be given, God’s judgments are even more unsearchable. Yet to believers it ought to be a most certain fact that the former is of the predestinated, the latter is not… Lastly, had not both been called, and followed Him that called them? And had not both become, from wicked men, justified men, and both been renewed by the laver of regeneration? But if he were to hear this who beyond all doubt knew what he was saying, he might answer and say: These things are true. In respect of all these things, they were of us.

So Augustine, nor did any Church Father or major theologian before or after him, taught Calvinism’s perseverance of the saints. Regarding Martin Luther, you can check out the following websites:

lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2647

Luther believed that salvation could be lost through loss of faith and deliberate sin leads to loss of faith:

In his Smalcald Articles, Luther wrote the following:

**On the other hand, if certain sectarists would arise, some of whom are perhaps already extant, and in the time of the insurrection [of the peasants] came to my own view, holding that all those who had once received the Spirit or the forgiveness of sins, or had become believers, even though they should afterwards sin, would still remain in the faith, and such sin would not harm them, and [hence] crying thus: “Do whatever you please; if you believe, it all amounts to nothing; faith blots out all sins,” etc.—they say, besides, that if any one sins after he has received faith and the Spirit, he never truly had the Spirit and faith: I have had before me [seen and heard] many such insane men, and I fear that in some such a devil is still remaining [hiding and dwelling].

43] It is, accordingly, necessary to know and to teach that when holy men, still having and feeling original sin, also daily repenting of and striving with it, happen to fall into manifest sins, as David into adultery, murder, and blasphemy, that then faith and the Holy Ghost has departed from them [they cast out faith and the Holy Ghost]. For the Holy Ghost does not permit sin to have dominion, to gain the upper hand so as to be accomplished, but represses and restrains it so that it must not do what it wishes. But if it does what it wishes, the Holy Ghost and faith are [certainly] not present**

To be continued…

God Bless,
Michael
 
Hi John,

The difference I would make with you is to contend that the Holy Catholic Church is (to me) simply an euphemism for the Universal Church. As such, it would contain elements of all legitimate Christian sects. We may not agree on that, but that is what I hold to.

God Bless
The catholic church had been around for 15 centuries before any other Christan church was formed. The catholic church was called Universal long before any other Christian church was formed. The catholic Church gained authority from The Christ through St. Peter. Now tell me, where did the other churches get their authority? GOD bless you, John J. Gillette
 
What I am saying is that all he predestined he will call, justify and glorify. However, all the justified have not been predestined to be glorified. Here is a quote from Saint Augustine from the Gift of Perseverance chapter 1

I Have now to consider the subject of perseverance with greater care; for in the former book also I said some things on this subject when I was discussing the beginning of faith. I assert, therefore, that the perseverance by which we persevere in Christ even to the end is the gift of God; and I call that the end by which is finished that life wherein alone there is peril of falling. Therefore it is uncertain whether any one has received this gift so long as he is still alive. For if he fall before he dies, he is, of course, said not to have persevered; and most truly is it said. How, then, should he be said to have received or to have had perseverance who has not persevered? For if any one have continence, and fall away from that virtue and become incontinent,— or, in like manner, if he have righteousness, if patience, if even faith, and fall away, he is rightly said to have had these virtues and to have them no longer; for he was continent, or he was righteous, or he was patient, or he was believing, as long as he was so; but when he ceased to be so, he no longer is what he was. But how should he who has not persevered have ever been persevering, since it is only by persevering that any one shows himself persevering,— and this he has not done? But lest any one should object to this, and say, If from the time at which any one became a believer he has lived— for the sake of argument— ten years, and in the midst of them has fallen from the faith, has he not persevered for five years? I am not contending about words. If it be thought that this also should be called perseverance, as it were for so long as it lasts, assuredly he is not to be said to have had in any degree that perseverance of which we are now discoursing, by which one perseveres in Christ even to the end. And the believer of one year, or of a period as much shorter as may be conceived of, if he has lived faithfully until he died, has rather had this perseverance than the believer of many years’ standing, if a little time before his death he has fallen away from the steadfastness of his faith.

From Chapter 21 from the same book:

But of two pious men, why to the one should be given perseverance unto the end, and to the other it should not be given, God’s judgments are even more unsearchable. Yet to believers it ought to be a most certain fact that the former is of the predestinated, the latter is not… Lastly, had not both been called, and followed Him that called them? And had not both become, from wicked men, justified men, and both been renewed by the laver of regeneration? But if he were to hear this who beyond all doubt knew what he was saying, he might answer and say: These things are true. In respect of all these things, they were of us.

So Augustine, nor did any Church Father or major theologian before or after him, taught Calvinism’s perseverance of the saints. Regarding Martin Luther, you can check out the following websites:

lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2647

Luther believed that salvation could be lost through loss of faith and deliberate sin leads to loss of faith:

In his Smalcald Articles, Luther wrote the following:

**On the other hand, if certain sectarists would arise, some of whom are perhaps already extant, and in the time of the insurrection [of the peasants] came to my own view, holding that all those who had once received the Spirit or the forgiveness of sins, or had become believers, even though they should afterwards sin, would still remain in the faith, and such sin would not harm them, and [hence] crying thus: “Do whatever you please; if you believe, it all amounts to nothing; faith blots out all sins,” etc.—they say, besides, that if any one sins after he has received faith and the Spirit, he never truly had the Spirit and faith: I have had before me [seen and heard] many such insane men, and I fear that in some such a devil is still remaining [hiding and dwelling].

43] It is, accordingly, necessary to know and to teach that when holy men, still having and feeling original sin, also daily repenting of and striving with it, happen to fall into manifest sins, as David into adultery, murder, and blasphemy, that then faith and the Holy Ghost has departed from them **[they cast out faith and the Holy Ghost]. For the Holy Ghost does not permit sin to have dominion, to gain the upper hand so as to be accomplished, but represses and restrains it so that it must not do what it wishes. But if it does what it wishes, the Holy Ghost and faith are [certainly] not present

To be continued…

God Bless,
Michael
Interesting . . .
 
The catholic church had been around for 15 centuries before any other Christan church was formed. The catholic church was called Universal long before any other Christian church was formed. The catholic Church gained authority from The Christ through St. Peter. Now tell me, where did the other churches get their authority? GOD bless you, John J. Gillette
This is a bit off-subject, but here’s the short answer: That’s just Catholic dogma, based upon a misreading of Christ’s comments to the apostle Peter. All authority is through Christ, and no one man can represent that authority. However, as Christ instructed Peter, the keys to the kingdom (the authority to perform Christ’s work in the setting of an ecclesia) were handed over to “wherever two or more” are gathered in His name.
 
Interesting . . .
I have more to say, but it will have to wait until tomorrow. 😦 For now, I will tell you this. The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints made its first appearance in Christian history not in the writings of Augustine or even Martin Luther, but in the writings of John Calvin. There is not a single piece of credible evidence that indicates that Christians believed in perseverance of saints prior to John Calvin. It is strange that a doctrine that is supposedly clearly taught in Scripture and so essential to a proper understanding of salvation was not only overlooked by all of the greatest saints and learned theologians for 1, 500 years, particularly those who taught a very high view of predestination (Augustine), but explicitly contradicted. Of course, I also believe that perseverance of the saints was not a part of Christian teaching for 1,500 years because it was not taught by Jesus or His apostles and it is contradicted by Scripture.

God Bless,
Michael
 
I have more to say, but it will have to wait until tomorrow. 😦 For now, I will tell you this. The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints made its first appearance in Christian history not in the writings of Augustine or even Martin Luther, but in the writings of John Calvin.
Ott disagrees with that:The Thomists, the Augustinians, the majority of the Scotists and also individual older Molinists (Suarez, St. Bellarmine) teach an absolute Predestination (ad gloriam tantum), therefore ante praevisa merita. According to them, God freely resolves from all Eternity, without consideration of the merits of man’s grace, to call certain men to beatification and therefore to bestow on them graces which will infallibly secure the execution of the Divine Decree (ordo intentionis).
40.png
mikeledes:
There is not a single piece of credible evidence that indicates that Christians believed in perseverance of saints prior to John Calvin.
Again, see Ott above, in which Ott states that Augustine did believe in predestination to beatification, and that God in eternity freely determined to bestow on them graces which will infallibly secure the execution of the Divine Decree (ordo intentionis).

What else could that mean? :hmmm:
40.png
mikeledes:
It is strange that a doctrine that is supposedly clearly taught in Scripture and so essential to a proper understanding of salvation was not only overlooked by all of the greatest saints and learned theologians for 1, 500 years, particularly those who taught a very high view of predestination (Augustine), but explicitly contradicted. Of course, I also believe that perseverance of the saints was not a part of Christian teaching for 1,500 years because it was not taught by Jesus or His apostles and it is contradicted by Scripture.
Ott says Augustine did teach preservation of the saints.

I don’t why you’d be bothered at all in development in the Doctrine by Calvin, and a further fleshing out of its specifics.

Isn’t Development of Doctrine a hallmark, and a battle cry used by your church apologists to explain many of her aberrant teachings???
 
Ott disagrees with that:The Thomists, the Augustinians, the majority of the Scotists and also individual older Molinists (Suarez, St. Bellarmine) teach an absolute Predestination (ad gloriam tantum), therefore ante praevisa merita. According to them, God freely resolves from all Eternity, without consideration of the merits of man’s grace, to call certain men to beatification and therefore to bestow on them graces which will infallibly secure the execution of the Divine Decree (ordo intentionis).

Again, see Ott above, in which Ott states that Augustine did believe in predestination to beatification, and that God in eternity freely determined to bestow on them graces which will infallibly secure the execution of the Divine Decree (ordo intentionis).

What else could that mean? :hmmm:

Ott says Augustine did teach preservation of the saints.

I don’t why you’d be bothered at all in development in the Doctrine by Calvin, and a further fleshing out of its specifics.

Isn’t Development of Doctrine a hallmark, and a battle cry used by your church apologists to explain many of her aberrant teachings???
While we do believe that there is a set number assured perseverance by Divine mercy, what Ott, Thomists, Augustinians, and Molinists believe in is not properly called perseverance of the saints. The most proper term would be perseverance of the elect. For example, the Haydock Catholic commentary says the following regarding John 10:28:

He speaks of his elect, of those whom he called by a special Providence and mercy, whom he blessed with more than ordinary graces, and with the gift of final perseverance to the end in his grace. (Witham)

Since in Calvinism the number of the just and the number of the elect are coextensive, perseverance of the saints and perseverance of the elect amounts to the same thing. Since Catholics, and Lutherans as well, do not believe that being justified and being elect for glory mean the same thing, then we would not call it “perseverance of the saints.”

What Calvin did was not “flesh out” or “develop” a doctrine. What he did was introduce a doctrine that contradicted 1,500 years of Christian teaching and biblical exegesis. If anyone would teach TULIP in the first 500 years of the Church, it would be Augustine. In fact, many Calvinists refer to Calvinism as “Augustinianism.” But Calvinism’s perseverance of the saints is not only absent in his writings, but contradicted. Since “perseverance of the saints” is so fundamental to the “Doctrines of Grace” and essential for a proper understanding of salvation and hence the Christian Gospel, it is strange that such a doctrine was never taught by any reputable Christian saint or theologian until John Calvin. And if it were clearly taught in Scripture, not only would one find at least one reference to it in 1,500 years, but I also believe that it would have been a universally accepted “fundamental” of Protestantism (Lutherans, Calvinists, and Arminians).

God Bless,
Michael
 
Great point.

But, of course, the only doctrine that matters is that which is derived from the Bible, and not tradition.

If only it were that simple :o Everyone reads the Bible within a Tradition - even those who absolutely detest Tradition; for that attitude is itself part of their Tradition. Catholics make the place & function of Tradition explicit, which Evangelicals tend not to do. If a Calvinist said he was led by the Holy Spirit to deny Limited Atonement, I doubt his fellow-Calvinists would be pleased 😃 And that’s another thing - Christians are not terribly good at allowing their Traditions to be challenged; the Bible is not often allowed to call the Tradition into question.​

Actually, it does teach nearly that. The Bible states that ALL OF US are born into this world on the path for hell and damnation. It’s just that SOME OF US are predestined to be saved from that path.

Or many of us are predestined to be saved - who knows ? Boettner thought so, in his 1957 book on Millennialism. I think it’s much better to love God than to worry about salvation 🙂 To be troubled about whether or not we are among the elect is to look at self - which is sure to be depressing. Jesus poured out His Love in self-giving self-sacrifice - which is surely the very opposite :).​

The Bible almost teaches double positive reprobation - which is not quite the same thing as double predestination; almost, but not quite. To get to double positive reprobation, one has to rely on logic, & to assume that God’s decrees in regard to the redeemed & the unredeemed are symmetrical. At most, the Bible tends towards DPR; it does not actually reveal it. If it is to be vindicated, Scripture does not go far enough; to get all the way, what the WestConFa calls “good and necessary consequence” has to be used.
The truth of the matter is that we are ALL born without free will. We mostly wander through this world in the grip of Satan’s power, with the ILLUSION of free will. But, once again, the Bible teaches the opposite.

If by FW you mean “autonomy from God”, I agree - such a thing is absolutely impossible. If what is meant is “liberty of specification”, liberty to do X rather than Y, I disagree. ISTM that once the Holy Spirit moves effectually in the unjustified sinner, the Holy Spirit can perfectly well justify the sinner (as per Romans 8.29-30) in such a way that the justified can co-operate with God. Not as a co-pilot, not as joint author of his salvation, but as being “taken up into” the working of God. So God does the whole work of salvation, and works some of it out through His People. Maybe free will is better understood if we think instead of libertas arbitrii, “liberty in judgement”.​

Absolutely nothing is possible to us without God - there are no exceptions at all. Any good we do is good insofar as its Author is God, & no further; we are instruments in His hands. God is the Author of Romans - Paul is the author of Romans. Neither statement contradicts the other, because the Divine Authorship is manifested through the human. That, or something like it, is how I see the efficacy of God & the activity of the Christian creature - for no creature can even exist, unless God call it into being & maintain it in being.
 
:confused: Why Calvinist and not Thomist or Augustinian? Why identify yourself with a theology that’s not completely compatible with Catholcism?

Because​

  • he has a lofty conception of God
  • he secures “the Rights of God” - man is kept firmly in his place.
  • his doctrine is better at accounting for some of what we believe as Catholics
  • I love the emphasis on God’s Glory 🙂
    Those are four reasons. Some things we believe make better sense within our belief if some Calvinism is grafted in; especially with matters such as Divine permission of evil, concursus, & God’s freedom from sin when man sins, to name only three. On the other side, I think Calvinism would be healthier if it learnt a few things from us.
While I lean more towards Thomism - particularly on the issue of unconditional election - I wouldn’t consider Molinism semi-pelagian. Arminianism equates prescience with predestination. In Molinism, predestination is much more than prescience and the order of grace or the world God has actualized is solely based on His free good pleasure. God is absolutely sovereign and has aboslute freedom in how He choses to exercise that sovereignty. Though Molinism is not free from problems.

God Bless,
Michael

What bothers me about Molinism is that God’s prevision of the acts of man comes - or certainly seems to come - horribly close to making God’s grace dependent on the good acts of man. That seems to preserve the name of grace, at the cost of emptying out its reality. God does not seem “totalitarian” enough.​

 
The Church was predestined by God, but her individual members, like me and you, were not. Likewise, businesses and companies are predestined by their founders, but their individual employees are not.
 
The Church was predestined by God, but her individual members, like me and you, were not. Likewise, businesses and companies are predestined by their founders, but their individual employees are not.
Dan86:
Jesus says that the Father knew every hair on our head before time began. God chose to will us into existence at a defined moment in time and space, this moment in time is unique
to each person. (This makes each person very special). God knows what the final out come will be for each of us, but He does not interfear with our free choice. We determine by our own free choice if it will be eternal life, or eternal death. But for those whose merits He forsaw, He predestined their reward.
God bless You, John J. Gillette
 
These are all interesting posts. I feel like the village idiot here, but I am so frustrated! Where is the HOPE in all of this? How can you try to help others, by telling them to turn to God in their despair because He is waiting for them, knowing that it might not be true? Would God** not be waiting **for them, because they aren’t one of the chosen? If we are his “children”, how could He not give each of us the opportunity to be counted among the elect?

Could someone give me a passage where Jesus states this? What about the Canaanite woman in the gospel of Matthew who came to Jesus asking Him to help her daughter? He ignored her at first and then stated that his mission was only for the lost sheep in the house of Israel. ( God’s **chosen people). “It is not right to take the food of sons and daughters and throw it to the dogs.” She replies, “Please Lord, even the dogs eat the leavings that fall from their masters’ tables.” Jesus tells her that her FAITH is so great that he has healed her daughter. You may say this has nothing to do with predestination; but I think it tells us that not only are the chosen ( predestined?) people heard, but surprisingly enough, those who are not chosen (predestined) are also heard ( saved?) because of their strong faith?

What about Jesus saying, Come to me,** all** who are weary, I will give you rest? He is calling All.

I think I do understand that God knows our hearts and minds and how we will react to His call; but I also think He can and does continue to tug at our heart and soul to bring us to Him. Doesn’t He want all of us? Wouldn’t God want all of us to be with Him forever? I know the path is narrow, but His mansion has many rooms, waiting for us. Will all be saved? No.

I just think that if I were trying to help someone know Christ, and they were told that only a select few are predestined for heaven, they would just throw up their hands in despair and walk away, thinking all is lost.**
 
Predstination in Catholicism involves more than just God’s foreknowledge of our choices. BTW, welcome to Catholic Answers Forums! 🙂

God Bless,
Michael
I do believe that God chooses to have mercy on whom he desires to have mercy on. However, since he desires all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4), then he does not prevent them from being saved. He is a just God as well as a merciful God. He tempts no man to sin. James 1:13"Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone."

1 Corinthians 10:13"No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it." He allows no man to be tempted beyond his ability to flee from the temptation.

Matthew 6:13 “And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one.” Mt. vi. 13; Lk. xi. 4; εἰσέρχεσθαι εἰς π., Mt. xxvi. 41; Mk. xiv. 38 [here Τ WH ἔρχ.]; Lk. xxii. 40, 46; adversity, affliction, trouble, [cf. our trial], sent by God and serving to test or prove one’s faith, holiness, character: plur. (from greekbiblestudy.org) It only means “temptation” in 1Pe 4:12.

God still knew beforehand that Esau would sell his birthright if put into a position to do so and this could be why Jacob was chosen instead of Esau.

God “hardens” is an archaic way of speaking; they were trying to put forth the idea adamantly that Pharaoh would not change his mind. God did not actually force Pharaoh to this stubbornness because he tempts no one and this would be against his own justice which is impossible for him to do.
 
Continued:

This “hardening” can mean that God did not extend his mercy to Pharaoh when he sinned because Pharaoh did not repent of his sin (God made no effort to help him repent) but “hardening” is never contrary to his justice. God is love and He does no evil.

"]Deuteronomy 31:17 “Then My anger shall be aroused against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured. And many evils and troubles shall befall them, so that they will say in that day, ‘Have not these evils come upon us because our God is not among us?”

Ezra 9:13 “And after all that has come upon us for our evil deeds and for our great guilt, since You our God have punished us less than our iniquities deserve, and have given us such deliverance as this,”

Psalm 5:4 “For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness, Nor shall evil dwell with You.”

3 John 1:11 “Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good. He who does good is of God, but[a] he who does evil has not seen God.”
 
Predestination is true, we just dont know if were predestined or not, all we can have is a moral certainty
 
Predestination is true, we just dont know if were predestined or not, all we can have is a moral certainty
I agree. We do not know for sure if we were predestined or not, but God knows. We must endure to the end of our lives in the grace of God in order to inherit eternal life. (Mark 13:13) He predestined us using His foreknowledge and this predestination was done before the foundation of the world according to what our free will choices would be for our entire lives.

1 Peter 1:1-3 “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied.”

Ephesians 1:4-5 “just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,”

It is up to us to use our free wills to be holy and without blame. God knows who will actually do this and it is only these persons who obey Him (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8, 1 John 2:4, Matthew 19:17) whom He predestined for eternal life as adopted sons.
 
Dear my Brothers and Sisters in Christ! May the Lord Jesus Christ be glorified in ALL we do and say!

Re: Why predestination is wrong…

It’s not!!! Anyone who teaches that salvation is earned is contradicting the Lord Jesus Christ and the Bible.

Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:8, “…for by grace you have been saved through faith, and* that not of yourselves; it is a gift of God, not of works*, lest anyone should boast.” (Emphasis Added)

John wrote in John 1:12-13 “…as many as received him [Christ], to them he gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe his name; who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (Emphasis added)

The Bible teaches that because we are so depraved in our sin that salvation must be a gift of God, for the will of our own fallen nature wants nothing to do with God, let alone acknowledging a need to be saved.

“Blessed be the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as he chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, by which he made us accepted in the Beloved.” Ephesians 1:3-6 (Emphasis added)

In John 6:65 Jesus himself speaks of not receiving any but those who have been given by the Father. “…no one can come to me unless it has been granted to Him by my father.”

It’s pretty clear that the Bible teaches predestination. None are righteous and desiring of God in their human nature, therefore it is a miracle that God has even chosen but one for salvation! God has chosen some for salvation and others for destruction, all to glorify himself! He gives us the faith and power to believe in him!

-Igy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top